Chapter XVII (2)

‘The king thinks, however,’ added Du Bellay, ‘that we preserve the celebration of mass; only there must not be more than three a day in every parish church; one before daybreak, for working men and servants; the second and third for the other worshippers,’ If transubstantiation and the _silly legends_ were rejected, the moderate protestants were ready to concede the daily celebration of the Eucharist. Du Bellay continued:—

‘As for the images of the saints, the king thinks, with you, that they are not set up to be worshipped, but to remind us of the faith and works of those whom they represent; and that is what the people ought to be taught.

‘His Majesty is also pleased with your opinions on free-will.’

The discussion—the great struggle in France—turned on purgatory; the ambassador slyly pointed out the reason: ‘Our divines obstinately defend it,’ he said, ‘for upon that doctrine depends the payment of masses, indulgences, and pious gifts. Put down purgatory, and you take away from them all opportunity of acquiring wealth and honor;[781] you cut off the limbs that supply their very life-blood! The king gave them some months to prove their doctrine by Scripture; they accepted the terms, but made no answer, and when the king pressed them, they exclaimed: “Ah, Sire, do not furnish our adversaries with weapons that they will afterwards turn against us.” It therefore appears to me that it would be proper for one of your doctors to write a treatise on the subject and present it to his Majesty.

‘As for good works, our theologians stoutly maintain their opinion; namely, that they are necessary. I told them that you thought the same, and that all you assert is, that the necessity of works cannot be affirmed so as to mean that we are justified and saved by them. An inquisitor of the faith has declared his agreement with Melancthon on this point.[782] I think, therefore, that we may come to an understanding on that matter.

[Sidenote: Monasteries And Celibacy.]

‘You do not like monasteries: well! The king hopes to obtain from the Roman party that no one shall be at liberty to take monastic vows before the age of thirty or forty; and that the monks shall be free henceforth to leave their convents and marry, if opportunity offers. The king thinks that not only the good of the Church requires it, but also the good of the State, for there are many capable men in the cloisters who might be usefully employed in divers functions and duties. His Majesty is therefore of opinion, not that monasteries should be destroyed, but that vows should be no longer obligatory. It is by taking one step after another that we shall come to an understanding.... It is not convenient to pluck off a horse’s tail at one pull.[783] Monasteries ought to be places of study, set apart for the instruction of those who are to teach the young. It is useful and even necessary to proceed with moderation.... His Majesty hopes to bring the Roman pontiff himself gradually to this idea.

‘As for the marriage of priests, the French theologians do not approve of it; but here the king holds a certain medium. He desires the toleration of those of your ecclesiastics who have wives; as for the others, he wishes they should remain in celibacy. If, however, there are any priests who desire to be married, let them marry; only they must at the same time quit holy orders.

‘As for the communion, the king hopes to obtain from the pope permission for every man to take the sacrament under one or both kinds, as his conscience may dictate. He declares that he has heard old men say that both kinds used to be given to the laity in France a hundred and twenty years ago; not indeed in the churches but in private chapels. And even to this day, the kings of France communicate under both kinds.’

This explanation of the reform projected for France, and the exchange of ideas which it had occasioned, occupied some time. The day was already advanced, and the protestant delegates were making ready to depart.[784] The ambassador hastened to add a few words to prove the sincerity of his proposals. ‘Cardinal Santa Croce,’ he said, ‘has already substituted psalms for the silly and ungodly hymns in the liturgy. True, the theologians of Paris have condemned the change. You see the Sorbonne claims such authority that it not only calls you heretics, but does not fear to condemn the cardinals and the pope himself.’[785] Thus, according to Du Bellay, protestants, king, cardinals, and pope were on one side, and the Sorbonne on the other. The Lutherans, being in such good company, had nothing to fear. To encourage them still more, he informed them that Francis I. admitted the point which they put forward as the very life-spring of their doctrine. ‘The king,’ he continued, ‘thinks highly of the doctrine of justification, as you explain it. It would please him much, if two or three of your learned men were sent to France to discuss these several points in his presence. We must take precautions that the best and soundest part of the Church be not conquered and crushed by numbers.[786] Lastly, it would be very beneficial,’ Du Bellay adroitly added, as he finished his speech, ‘if the princes and deputies of the cities here assembled were to intercede in behalf of those who are exiled on account of religion, and to ask that no one should hereafter suffer any injury for what he thinks, says, or does with respect to his faith.’[787] How could the protestants, after such a compassionate solicitation, speak any more of the scaffolds of the 21st of January?

[Sidenote: Reformation Of Francis I.]

Such was the Reformation which Francis I. declared him-self willing to give France. As concerns doctrine, it was much more complete than the hybrid system which Henry VIII. was at that time endeavoring to set up in England. The protestants found these propositions acceptable enough in general, with some modifications, doubtless, which could not fail to be introduced: the imperfect reform of the French king would be completed by degrees. Had not his ambassador just said that it was dangerous to pull out a horse’s tail at once, giving them to understand that it would be pulled out hair by hair? The Reformation proclaimed, the evangelical doctrine professed, the frivolities of public worship put away, the Sorbonne placed under ban, the sounder part of Christendom preponderating over the more numerous part,—the cardinals and the pope himself (as Du Bellay hinted) aiding in this transformation,—what important advantages! One thing, however, was still wanting: many asked not only whether the catholics would carry out the Reformation to an end, as they hinted, but even whether they would maintain the concessions they had made.

This thought engrossed the attention of the protestant delegates. They made their report, however, to their principals, and amid the doubts by which they were agitated one thing only appeared urgent to the men of the Augsburg Confession—the duty of interceding in favor of their brethren in France. They commissioned Melancthon to draw up the answer to Du Bellay, and on the 22d of December, the French envoy having been once more admitted into the assembly of the princes and deputies, the vice-chancellor said to him: ‘That the most puissant king of France by sending them an ambassador as illustrious by his virtues as eminent by his rank, and the duty imposed on him to treat concerning matters of faith, the importance of which was paramount in their eyes, manifestly showed them the Christian zeal with which the king was animated—a zeal most worthy of so good a prince: that the reports circulated with respect to certain punishments that had taken place in France could not in truth authorize the States of Germany to form a judgment on the puissant monarch of that kingdom; however, they besought him not to allow himself to be carried away by the cruelty of men who, ignorant of the truth, desire to act severely against good and bad without distinction; that idle opinions having crept into the Church, it was necessary to apply a remedy, but those who endeavored to do so became objects of the bitterest hatred—the papists, who clung to their abuses, striving by a thousand artifices to inflame the hearts of kings and to arm them against the innocent.[788] For this reason the States assembled at Smalcalde conjured his Majesty to prohibit such iniquitous cruelty, and to advance the good of the Church and the glory of God.’

The evangelicals having discharged this duty passed rapidly over the rest. They represented to the ambassador that the proposal to send learned men into France was of such importance, that it was impossible to give him an immediate answer, but that the deputies would report thereon to the chiefs as soon as they returned home. ‘We assure you, however,’ they said in conclusion, ‘that nothing would please us more than to see the doctrine of piety and the concord of nations propagated more and more by means in conformity with the Word of God.’[789]

After a postponement, which seemed almost a refusal, Du Bellay felt embarrassed, for he had still to discharge the principal mission that his master had entrusted to him. He could not, however, leave Smalcalde without fulfilling it. He did not make it known distinctly in his public speeches, but solicited the protestants in private conversations to make an alliance with the king his master. The latter answered that the first condition of such a union would be that the allies should undertake nothing against the emperor, the head of the Germanic Confederation. Now it was precisely for the purpose of acting against Charles V. that Francis I. sought the friendship of evangelical Germany. Du Bellay left Smalcalde dissatisfied.

[Sidenote: Francis Plays Two Parts.]

The distrust of the Lutheran princes was not unreasonable. While the king was acting the protestant beyond the Rhine, he was acting the papist beyond the Alps; if the emperor would consent to yield Milan to him, Francis I. would bind himself to reduce Germany under the yoke of the house of Austria. ‘I will spare nothing,’ he said, ‘for the greatness of the said emperor and his brother the king of the Romans.’[790] He went further than this: ‘Let the pope say the word, and I will constrain England by force of arms to submit to the Church.’ The cruel paw peeped out from beneath the skin of the lamb, and the lion suddenly appeared, ready to attack, seize, and devour, as a delicate morsel, those whom he treated as friends and companions.

The cause of truth and unity was not to triumph by means of a congress at Smalcalde, by diplomatic negotiations, or by the instrumentality of Francis I. He who said, _My kingdom is not of this world_, did not choose men of the world to establish his kingdom, and will not permit a monotonous uniformity to take the place of unity in his empire. Treaties, constitutions, and forms prescribed by monarchs are human elements which the kingdom of heaven repudiates. True unity does not proceed from an identical administration, a clerical organization, or a pompous hierarchy: it is essentially moral and spiritual, and consists in community of thoughts, faith, affections, works, and hopes. Diversity of forms, far from injuring it, gives it more intensity. In the sixteenth century the world was far, and is still far, from seeing the realization of this divine unity. Some steps, however, have been taken, and the time no doubt will come when, according to the scriptural prophecy, all the families of the earth will be blessed in Christ Jesus.[791] But there will be no real, free, evangelical catholicity until Christians understand and realize those elementary words of the primitive Church: _I believe in the communion of saints_.

Footnote 715:

_Supra_, vol. ii. ch. xxi. bk. 2.

Footnote 716:

_Historia belli Anabaptistarum monasteriensis_, by H. von
Kerssenbroeck.

Footnote 717:

‘Viri optimi et fidelissimi Voræi testimonium.’—Melancthon G. Bellaio,
_Corp. Ref._ ii. 315.

Footnote 718:

‘Cum eo locutus de profectione ad Regem.’,—Camerarius, _Vita
Melancthonis_, p. 148. Camerarius was an intimate friend of
Melancthon’s.

Footnote 719:

‘Obsides qui darentur dum abesset..... Præsidia quibus
deduceretur.’—_Ibid._

Footnote 720:

‘Pæne orbis terrarum fortunam esse positam.’—_Ibid._

Footnote 721:

‘In illis fluctibus et sævissimis tempestatibus, jam portum et
tutissimam stationem.’—_Ibid._

Footnote 722:

‘Sopiti ignes rursum suscitarentur, et suppliciorum immanitas
recrudesceret.’—_Ibid._

Footnote 723:

‘Advocari ipsum Dei Christique Jesu voce.’—Camerarius, _Vita
Melancthonis_, p. 148.

Footnote 724:

‘Afficiebatur atque perturbabatur.’—_Ibid._

Footnote 725:

‘Non respectus ad se aut suos, non longiquitas loci, non periculorum
metus.’—_Ibid._ p. 149.

Footnote 726:

‘In quibus potissimum falsitas impietatis resideret.’—Camerarius,
_Vita Melancthonis_, p. 150.

Footnote 727:

‘Quid ipse tamen rex posset efficere—non sine causa
dubitabat.’—_Ibid._ p. 150.

Footnote 728:

‘Nullam enim rem unquam majore Regem cura, studio, sollicitudine animi
complectendam duxisse.’—Camerarius, _Vita Melancthonis_, p. 151.

Footnote 729:

‘Neque se abduci ullius persuasione sineret ex tam pio sanctoque
instituto.’—_Ibid._

Footnote 730:

‘Er wollte nicht in Frankreich wiederkommen, so ich nicht mit
zöge.’—_Corp. Ref._ ii. p. 905.

Footnote 731:

Bossuet, _Hist. des Variations_, t. i. liv. v. ch. ii. et xix.

Footnote 732:

_Loci communes theologici._ They went through sixty-seven editions,
and were translated into several languages.

Footnote 733:

‘Non puto contendendum esse, nisi de magnis et necessariis
rebus.’—Melancthon Sturmio, _Corp. Ref._ ii. p. 917.

Footnote 734:

‘Ich wollte einen Ritt in Frankreich thun.’—_Corp. Ref._ ii. p. 904.

Footnote 735:

_Ibid._ ii. pp. 903-905.

Footnote 736:

‘Aulica quædam μυοτήρια vel potius odia sunt.’—_Corp. Reform._ ii. p.
903.

Footnote 737:

‘Zerrüttung, unwiederbringlicher Nachtheil, Beschwerung und Schade zu
erfolgen.’—_Corp. Ref._ ii. p. 908.

Footnote 738:

‘Subindignabundus hinc discessit,’ said Luther. _Ep._ iv. p. 621.

Footnote 739:

‘Philippus . . . . me consule libens proficisceretur.’—Lutheri _Ep._
iv. p. 621.

Footnote 740:

‘Bluthünde,’ bloodhounds. _Ibid._ p. 620.

Footnote 741:

‘Ego non annis, sed viribus, decrepitus fio, ad labores antemeridianos
pene totus inutilis factus.’—Lutheri _Ep._ iv. p. 623 (23d August,
1535).

Footnote 742:

‘Nachdem aber Dr. Martinus bey uns zu Torgau auch gewest, so haben wir
Ihm solches ungefährlich vermeldet.’ This declaration of the elector
incontestably proves the fact of Luther’s journey to Torgau with this
object. The time cannot be fixed, but the elector speaks of it in a
paper addressed to Bruck on the 19th of August. _Corp. Ref._ ii. p.
908.

Footnote 743:

Seckendorf, _Historie des Lutherthums_, p. 1497.

Footnote 744:

_Ibid._ p. 1498.

Footnote 745:

Luther to Jonas, 1 Sept. 1535. _Ep._ iv. p. 628.

Footnote 746:

_Corpus Reformat._ ii. p. 909. Seckendorf, _Historie des Lutherthums_,
p. 1458.

Footnote 747:

‘Ego suspectos cœpi habere istos legatos tuos.’—Lutheri _Ep._ iv. p.
627.

Footnote 748:

‘Invenirent loca in quibus viverent.’—_Ibid._

Footnote 749:

‘Wir viel mehr fördern wollten dasz fremde _nationes zu_ dem Evangelio
gebracht wurden.’—_Corpus Reform._ ii. p. 911.

Footnote 750:

‘Propter hæc verba nolui proficisci.’—_Corpus Ref._ ii. p. 911, in
note. The italics in the text indicate the lines underscored by
Melancthon.

Footnote 751:

The passage is found in Bruck’s copy (Weimar Archives), but not in
Melancthon’s.

Footnote 752:

‘Nunquam sensi asperiorem principem.’—_Corpus Reform._ ii. p. 915.

Footnote 753:

‘Nunc autem est democratia aut tyrannis indoctorum.’—_Ibid._ p. 917.

Footnote 754:

‘Plane fatum mihi Theramenis impendere videtur.’—_Ibid._ p. 918.

Footnote 755:

‘Cogito varia, quæ utinam non cogitarem.’—Lutheri _Ep._ iv. p. 626.

Footnote 756:

‘An devoraveris litteras istas principis.’—_Ibid._ p. 627.

Footnote 757:

‘Incipio enim unice gaudere, nos ab aula contemni et excludi.’—_Ibid._

Footnote 758:

‘Scilicet ne ad rempublicam adhibeamur.’—_Ibid._ p. 628.

Footnote 759:

Lutheri _Ep._ iv. p. 627.

Footnote 760:

‘Ad insignem propagationem, uberrimum et amplissimum fructum
Evangelii.’—Johannes Fredericus ad Franciscum regem Galliæ. _Corpus
Reform._ ii. p. 906.

Footnote 761:

_Corpus Reform._ ii. p. 903.

Footnote 762:

‘Pro religionis christianæ defensione præcipue velut in statione
perpetuo fuit.’—_Ibid._ p. 913.

Footnote 763:

‘Suscipit curam sanandæ doctrinæ christianæ; non tamen violentis
remediis, sed vera ratione.’—_Ibid._

Footnote 764:

‘Ut potius (rex) det operam, ut illustretur gloria Christi.’—_Corpus
Reform._ ii. p. 916.

Footnote 765:

‘Sadoleti scriptum . . . . . eadem dicit quæ nos defendimus.’—_Ibid._
p. 917.

Footnote 766:

See his treatise: _De transitu Hellenismi ad Christianismum_,
dedicated to the king in 1535.

Footnote 767:

‘Hoc studium nulla mihi eripiet hominum iniquitas.’—_Corp. Ref._

Footnote 768:

‘Ad publicam christianæ, reipublicæ pacem spectantibus.’ 2d Dec.,
1535. _Corp. Ref._ ii. p. 1015.

Footnote 769:

‘Nunquam in meliori loco fuit res Evangelii, quam sit hoc tempore in
Gallia.’ Sturm to Bucer.

Footnote 770:

‘Maximopere obtestantes ut pro virili nobiscum incumbatis in tam pium
sanctumque opus.’ _Corp. Ref._ ii. p. 1010. Seckendorf says (_Hist.
Luth._ p. 1146) that this letter had been sent to the Elector
beforehand; but in the documents of the State Paper Office at Weimar
we read: ‘Hæc locutus reddidit principi litteras quas vocant
credentiales.’ And the _Corpus_ gives in a note the letter we have
just quoted.

Footnote 771:

‘Quæ voluntas, quam amica, quam benevola, quam constans.’—_Corp. Ref._
ii. p. 1010.

Footnote 772:

‘Ut aliud agentibus et aliud significantibus.’ Bellaii ad principes
Oratio.—_Ibid._ p. 1012.

Footnote 773:

Sleidan, _Mémoires sur l’État de la Religion et de la République_, i.
p. 389.

Footnote 774:

‘Ut quos diversitas opinionum sejunxerit, similitudo doctrinæ
conjungat.’—_Corp. Ref._ ii. p. 1013.

Footnote 775:

Sleidan, i. p. 392.

Footnote 776:

He must not be confounded with Professor Sturm, who was then in Paris.

Footnote 777:

‘Sub diluculum.’—_Corp. Ref._ ii. p. 1014.

Footnote 778:

‘Esse enim solum qui in suo regno imperet.’—_Corp. Ref._ ii. p. 1015.

Footnote 779:

‘Orationes et legendas multas ut ineptas et impias abrogandas, aut
saltem emendandas; multa enim in his absurda, multa ridicula.’—_Ibid._
p. 1015.

Footnote 780:

Bessarion, born at Trebizond in 1395, Greek bishop of Nicæa, and
afterwards Cardinal of the Roman Church, endeavored to unite the two
Churches, and was on the point of being elected pope.

Footnote 781:

‘Videre enim eos, alioqui sibi tolli omnes occasiones acquirendi opes,
honores, et omnia.’—_Corp. Ref._ ii. p. 1015.

Footnote 782:

‘De fide quoque inquisitorem fidei recte sentire.’—_Corp. Ref._ ii. p.
1016.

Footnote 783:

‘Sicut etiam cauda equina non statim et commode tota evelli
possit.’—_Corp. Ref._ ii. p. 1016.

Footnote 784:

‘Nobis jam abituris.’—_Corp. Ref._ ii. p. 1017.

Footnote 785:

‘Sed etiam cardinales, papam quoque ipsum, condemnare non
dubitant.’—_Corp. Ref._ ii. p. 1017.

Footnote 786:

‘Melior et sanior pars a majore vincatur et opprimatur.’—_Corp. Ref._
ii. p. 1018.

Footnote 787:

‘Nequid fraudi sit, quod quisque senserit, dixerit, egerit.’—_Corp.
Ref._ ii. p. 1018.

Footnote 788:

‘Variis artificiis regum animos incendunt atque armant adversus eos.’
_Corp. Ref_. ii. p. 1024.

Footnote 789:

‘Nihil enim optatius quam ut latissime propagetur pia doctrina et
multarum gentium concordia.’—_Corp. Ref._ ii. p. 1026.

Footnote 790:

Mémoires de Du Bellay, p. 243.

Footnote 791:

Genesis xii. 3.